index_status

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It describes the inspection as a read-only operation (inspect, discover), which is appropriate, but it does not explicitly state the lack of side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The description is adequate but lacks explicit safety declarations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Inspect the active index') followed by details on what it discovers and usage context. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description effectively explains what the tool returns: selected source, cache status, file/chunk counts, languages, and tools. It also provides usage guidance. It is nearly complete, though it could explicitly mention that the operation is read-only.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds context (e.g., 'before searching') but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters well.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it inspects the active index for a local path or Git repository, listing specific information like source, cache status, file count, and languages. It distinguishes from siblings like search (which uses the index) and clear/refresh (which modify it).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says 'Use this to discover ... before searching,' providing clear context for when to use it. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, the context of sibling tools and the phrase 'before searching' guide usage effectively.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.